click to show more information

click to hide/show information About your Search

20121101
20121130
Search Results 0 to 5 of about 6
to the pentagon and ig on the one hand and to the fbi with regards to general petraeus. >> but he's not, i mean big picture watching this, shaking his head saying, guys, we need a more sense of leadership here? >> he's not going to make a grand pronouncement or decisions about things based on, you know, two situations, two individual cases. he's focused on the missions that the military's tasked with carrying out and the cia and the general intelligence community tasked with carrying out, and with acting overall agenda which encompasses not just national security policy, but obviously domestic policy. >> thank you. >> yes. >> jay, has the president spoke to general allen directly? >> not that i'm aware of, no. >> spoke with secretary panetta? >> i have to check that. secretary panetta has been traveling. >> as a follow-up question, does the president see this in general as an unwelcomed distraction at a time when she's just -- was re-elected, and he has a bunch of priorities in terms of the fiscal cliff and in terms of the cabinet? >> well, i certainly, i think wouldn't call it welcome, but obv
, the uniform crime numbers you're talking about, that's the numbers that the fbi uses to look at crimes so people report. there is a, the other, which i think you're familiar with, the other one that has to do with -- includes home invasion, kidnapping, and the other things that people included. the fbi is slowly shifting over the area. the state of texas got a federal grant years ago to do that shift except when i got my fbi briefing, texas is only at 12%. we can start doing that, you know, categorizing more numbers to get this for the people, people want, but, but, we got to remember we don't want to overload our law enforcement, fill out paperworks like we did with teachers some time ago. we want them on the street rather than filling out paperwork, but the state of texas, actually, is doing some of that. we just put money there in the state of texas, get all the figures that you want to. >> we spoke about this briefly, and i want to ask before i head to questions from the audience. two years from now, you may be campaigning for higher office -- >> [inaudible] >> when the website was la
coastal town in california. he was the subject, on the fbi most wanted list and responsible for 20 murders in boston. no american official knew where he was. it's hard to prove negatives but we have 6000 documents from the bin laden compound that have been translated. if there's there is a smoking gun, proving official pakistani passivity operations are not so good that we would not pointed out publicly at this point. >> the difference between diplomats and journalists is that journalists say more than they know and diplomats no morew more than they say. but we are in harmony on this one. [laughter] there is no evidence i have seen that there was high-level complicity or knowledge about him being in abbottabad. this led to the problem that if you don't know you can be a accused of and confidence in this was a domestic issue but that is a different question than we are talking about. there is to my knowledge no evidence that they knew that he was there during that time. >> one quick follow up, al qaeda tried to kill general musharraf. al qaeda was at war with the pakistani state and the pak
qaeda? is that right? so if our military is authorized to use force, they don't have to call the f.b.i. or the virginia state police to shoot. they can shoot themselves against an enemy coming at them in america. mr. levin: coming here and attacking us, a navy base or at a -- mr. graham: sliewlg. right. because we're not fighting a crime. we don't have to disarm our military and call the local cops, "would you please shoot these people they get here." no, we're going to shoot you. if you get in a boat asked to attack a military ship or boat in the united states, we're going to shoot you. and if we wound you, we're going to capture you. and then here's what we're going to do to you, incident of using force. the supreme court has said that when you authorize to use force, it makes no sense to give that authorization if you don't have the power to detain. because the worst thing you could do to the american military is to make them to kill everybody and capture no one. or let the other -- or let them go. so kill them all is not good policy and it's a bad spot to put your military in, and
are not having a war on your orders and making sure the international community sends billions of fbi success and making sure that the people see results for their elections, and political success is making sure that hamas and gaza doesn't govern the relationship with egypt but that egypt governs the relationship with a hamas. if this is the root of the government of egypt pursues, then the potential for the working relationship with israel is possible. if it tries to achieve political success in the it the logical means, then we in the united states will be in a very difficult position and the israelis will be in an even more difficult position. .. >> you have a question earlier. no? okay, howard. >> ten years ago we were frantically trying to buy stinger missiles in bosnia should probably gotten there from afghanistan. the question i have come is if we do consider legal support to the syria and freedom fighters, how do we manage especially when it comes to no presence at all, how do we manage to control where those go and how they might get used? >> when i made a reference to seeing the nee
use on the fbi's most wanted list. is responsible for 20 murders in boston. no american official knew what he was. there's no evidence to suggest that. it's hard to prove negligence but with 6000 doctors from the bin laden compound that has been transited if it was a smoking gun i would be interested in ambassador munter's observation. if there was a smoking gun, our observation on oscar we would not a pointed it out publicly at this point. >> you know, the difference between diplomats and journalists is that journalists say more than they know and diplomats no more than they say. [laughter] but we are in harmony on this one. [laughter] >> know, there is now evidence that i've seen that there was high level complicity or knowledge about him being in abbottabad. this led to the problem that if you don't know, you can be accused of incompetence and this was a domestic issue for the pakistan military and intelligence but that's a different question than we're talking about. there is to my knowledge no evidence a new he was there during the time. >> al qaeda tried to kill general musharra
Search Results 0 to 5 of about 6